what happens when Constitutional rights collide

 

what happens when Constitutional rights collide. Here are some suggestions:

Religious rights (1st amendment) versus equal protection (14th amendment): https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/05/opinions/masterpiece-cakeshop-supreme-court-opinion-gupta

Freedom of speech (1st amendment) versus equal protection/protected classes (14th amendment) https://djclpp.law.duke.edu/article/the-dynamic-relationship-between-freedom-of-speech-and-equality/

Freedom from Search/seizure (4th amendment) versus right to carry a firearm (2nd amendment: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/04/why-liberals-should-be-alarmed-that-courts-are-eroding-the-second-amendment.html#:~:text=The%20Fourth%20Amendment%20protects%20individuals,he%20is%20carrying%20a%20firearm%3F

Should mandatory draft registration be imposed on both men and women?

Sample Solution

their choice of definition elements. For example, an examination of the “civilian” and “fear” definitional elements by authors from Middle East (ME), Western Europe (WE) and North America (NA) showed marked differences. While experts from the ME had a 0% civilian component, 50% included fear in their definitions. Contrarily, WE and NA authors had a 40% and 20% civilian element and 20% and 17% highlighted the fear component respectively. This to some extent confirms Drake’s (1989) assertion regarding the nature of the definition of terrorism, when he argued that no singular definition can sufficiently capture the meaning of the word. Thus, the word is open to the subjective interpretations of speakers depending on their cultural, political or social leaning (p. xiv).

Richard (2014) study approached terrorism as a mode of violence, appropriated by different groups, states, and ideologies. His definition of terrorism is a product of three key assumptions:

a. No act of violence “is in and of itself inherently terrorist” (p. 222).

According to the author, terrorist’s events are products of a host of violence-based techniques such as bombing, kidnapping for ransom, theft, hostage taking, and more. These approaches are not unique to terrorist organisations, but are also employed by different groups, from social movements to ‘legitimate’ states. However, the techniques adopted become terrorist, only when layers of meaning are applied.

b. Terrorism as a method of violence is vastly applied across groups, causes and ideologies (p. 224).

Terrorism as a method of violence relates to the end-game of a particular act of violence, which is mainly to terrorise; not the specific techniques adopted. The author asserted, therefore, that since this method has been adopted by different groups, there is a need to distinguish terrorist groups, from groups that employ the strategy.

 

Terrorists attack just about anyone, at times of peace or warfare, as long as the victims or object of attack serve sufficiently as message generators to a wider group or audience.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.